How do we respond to the "sex abuse scandal"?

[RonTheNewJew]

Ron, good to have you on board, as an elder brother, if I may put it that way. You are correct, celibacy is a discipline not a doctrine that exists in the Latin Rite- it could be changed. However, this option was discussed at a recent Synod of Bishops. The Eastern Catholic Bishops, from a jurisdiction where married clergy are the norm, advised against changing the discipline in the West. Why was that? Because of all the attendant difficulties with married clergy (e.g. priests being unable or unwilling to move, for family reasons; separated and divorced priests). I’m curious to know- do issues like this occur with rabbis?

Celibacy is an exception, a gift of supernatural grace. It’s providential, in my opinion, that it has been given to the Latin Church as a norm. Removing the norm would do little, if anything, to reduce abuse, as others have shown.

Thanks Tybourne. I appreciate the compiment. Being old and Jewish Christian may have an occasional advantage. I guess what I was thinking, where a change to priests marrying is concerned, is that if it were done in a gradual, sort of step-by-step way, allowing those who really want to be priests of the Catholic Church, but who have undeniable emotional needs that only a family can provide (and that includes those who do not see marriage as just a sexual outlet), it would seem that a small segment of younger priests could be somehow allowed to marry, as a sort of trial balloon, if you will. If the thing lands safely, with the priests on board, then people would know it works.

If the same priests also have among them those who also begin abusing young Catholic teenaged boys, then surely the rest of those priests who are married would turn him in, and not where some cover-up for what a few have done. I guess one question I have is, why is there a cover-up by other priests and their leaders?

As to the question of rabbis, the unfortunate reality in areas where non-Christian Jews, who practice the religious practices of the written Torah, but who also subscribe to the beliefs contained in Talmudic and Mishna teachings, some of which, estpecially those of pre-Christian times, disagree with the plain teachings of the Law God gave to Moses, are given a sort of feeling that, because the sayings that were then written by experienced rabbis, aside from the Mosaic Law, somehow all came from God. Some of them even thought of themselves as having some special connection to God, and were then somehow unable to sin. This is no lie. They told the Israelites lies about what God would allow them to do.

Thus, when the religious Jews, and their offspring, stopped keeping the Sabbath, and the annual festival convocations at a place where God said, “I choose to place My Name,” they began devising schemes whereby israelite men could go to seances, meetings with sorcorers, religious meetings where even babies were sacrificed, and homosexual or other debaucheries took place in the name of pagan gods, the nation lost it’s will to stick to God’s only Torah, including the Ten Commandments and the statutes and judgements meant to keep the people faithful to the Ten Words.

Israel was no different back then, than some apparently may well be in New York. Generally, though, because of past persecutions of religious Jews by “Christians” and others, the rabbinical leaders of today, usually put such a rabbi into some form of sex therapy treatment program that treats sexual addiction. Treatment is a form of “covering-up.” But, if there is another offense, because treatment records are strictly kept, there is the ability then that law enforcement, and a subpoena can release those records when charges are filed. Treatment first. Then, the rest of the rabbinical leadership’s form of “he gets the axe.” He is no longer a rabbi!

He cannot preach, teach, be employed by a synagogue of administration having anything to do with congregants who are young males, or females if his preference for sexual assault is females. The close-knit Jewish community, based on culture and religious heritage, provides a kind of intelligence network that should, though likely not always as you have noted, prevent further child sexual abuse by rabbis or other teachers.

I remember that my friend and I, way back in 1966, visited Temple Beth Israel in Portland, Oregon. A very beautful, dome-shaped synagogue, with a ceiling inside at 135 feet above the floor, and a magnificent pipe organ. We attended Oneg Shabbos, and the Erev Shabbat that followed. Great food. Wonderful, God-fearing people. But, we were invited by an old, white-haired man who was vice-principal of the Beth Israel grade school. He invited us into his large office and closed and locked the door. Chit-chat that led to his asking us if we had ever thought of having oral sex with another male. I was about 21 and my friend was about 20.

I cannot describe the shock we felt. The turmoil inside because here we were, invited by a leader of the congregation to what we thought would be a discussion of religious beliefs between Christians and Jews (I was non-religious then. My friend was a very devout Seventh-day Adventist, and wonderful person. We looked at each other, then back at him. We got up and left the synagogue, never to return. Angry!

But, then, only a few years ago, my wife and I studied the Torah, with Jesus at the center, where it is obvious the old Jewish man had never gone before in his thinking or reading, if he did any. Now, we are fully Torah observant Messianic Jews who have discovered the Holy Spirit’s power to help us learn it and keep it just as Jesus (Yeshua) did. Jesus and His Torah religion is what saved me, and my wife. He is coming soon. Hallelujah!

 

[twb1621]

I posted this earlier in another thread but it is more than appropriate to post here.

What Church, what faith does Matthew CH24, v10-15 (below) or any other scriptural verse pertain to when it speaks of Christ’s disciples or Church directly? It speaks of our Church, our Faith, the one Church founded on the Blood of Christ with the lineage in the teachings of scripture that prove itself.

We know scripture tells us Jesus made a covenant to never abandon His Church, That He with be with His Church all days unto the consummation of the world, that she would never fall and that she would always be guided by the Holy Spirit until His return. We also know according to scripture that in all things Jesus maintains primacy and that by the Father’s will all things in heaven and on earth He shall reconcile to Himself. He even went as far as to warn us of the deceit and corruption that would arise at times both from outside and within His Church, yet asks for perseverance.

I (as should every single Catholic who claims him or herself to be of the FAITHFUL) am without any reservations whatsoever that Jesus, who as the High Priest of His Church and who has the authority of God the Heavenly Father, to reconcile all things to Himself In heaven and on earth, is perfectly capable of making those determinations and to effect judgment as and when and how He deems appropriate. In fact, I am sure He is and has been involved. I have no doubts that justice by the Hand of God will be implemented appropriately. I also guarantee those who are truly faithful to Christ in His Church will persevere and appose any corruption within regardless of superficial criticism or insignificant judgments of those with bias. Those who separate or walk away are no different then any other weak in faith as did the disciples who could not accept His proclamation His Body and Blood being the food of salvation. But it is the Faithful who will stand even taller with the faith and trust in the covenant He made with His Bride.

Latin Vulgate
Matthew CH24; 10 And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one another: and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. 12 And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. 13 But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom, shall be preached in the whole world, for a testimony to all nations, and then shall the consummation come. 15 When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.

We are obviously in that one true Church of which Jesus founded with His Blood. Scripture speaks of no other.

***How should we respond? There is but one Church founded by the Blood of Jesus Christ and only one Church ever referred to in scripture of which Jesus made His covenant with, that will not fall but most certainly will suffer in ALL ways according to the prophetic warnings Jesus gave us. Would satan as an adversary waste time attacking and infiltrating that which would have little benefit to him? No… Jesus gave us the warnings, not only to be prepared as the events occur but to realize this is without doubt the True Church of Jesus Christ as scripture describes and we are those called to persevere. ***

There is but one and one teaching within her;
***“…by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment. (***1 Corinthians CH1; v10)

 

[twb1621]

Thanks Tybourne. I appreciate the compiment. Being old and Jewish Christian may have an occasional advantage. I guess what I was thinking, where a change to priests marrying is concerned, is that if it were done in a gradual, sort of step-by-step way, allowing those who really want to be priests of the Catholic Church, but who have undeniable emotional needs that only a family can provide (and that includes those who do not see marriage as just a sexual outlet), it would seem that a small segment of younger priests could be somehow allowed to marry, as a sort of trial balloon, if you will. If the thing lands safely, with the priests on board, then people would know it works.

If the same priests also have among them those who also begin abusing young Catholic teenaged boys, then surely the rest of those priests who are married would turn him in, and not where some cover-up for what a few have done. I guess one question I have is, why is there a cover-up by other priests and their leaders?

As to the question of rabbis, the unfortunate reality in areas where non-Christian Jews, who practice the religious practices of the written Torah, but who also subscribe to the beliefs contained in Talmudic and Mishna teachings, some of which, estpecially those of pre-Christian times, disagree with the plain teachings of the Law God gave to Moses, are given a sort of feeling that, because the sayings that were then written by experienced rabbis, aside from the Mosaic Law, somehow all came from God. Some of them even thought of themselves as having some special connection to God, and were then somehow unable to sin. This is no lie. They told the Israelites lies about what God would allow them to do.

Thus, when the religious Jews, and their offspring, stopped keeping the Sabbath, and the annual festival convocations at a place where God said, “I choose to place My Name,” they began devising schemes whereby israelite men could go to seances, meetings with sorcorers, religious meetings where even babies were sacrificed, and homosexual or other debaucheries took place in the name of pagan gods, the nation lost it’s will to stick to God’s only Torah, including the Ten Commandments and the statutes and judgements meant to keep the people faithful to the Ten Words.

Israel was no different back then, than some apparently may well be in New York. Generally, though, because of past persecutions of religious Jews by “Christians” and others, the rabbinical leaders of today, usually put such a rabbi into some form of sex therapy treatment program that treats sexual addiction. Treatment is a form of “covering-up.” But, if there is another offense, because treatment records are strictly kept, there is the ability then that law enforcement, and a subpoena can release those records when charges are filed. Treatment first. Then, the rest of the rabbinical leadership’s form of “he gets the axe.” He is no longer a rabbi!

He cannot preach, teach, be employed by a synagogue of administration having anything to do with congregants who are young males, or females if his preference for sexual assault is females. The close-knit Jewish community, based on culture and religious heritage, provides a kind of intelligence network that should, though likely not always as you have noted, prevent further child sexual abuse by rabbis or other teachers.

I remember that my friend and I, way back in 1966, visited Temple Beth Israel in Portland, Oregon. A very beautful, dome-shaped synagogue, with a ceiling inside at 135 feet above the floor, and a magnificent pipe organ. We attended Oneg Shabbos, and the Erev Shabbat that followed. Great food. Wonderful, God-fearing people. But, we were invited by an old, white-haired man who was vice-principal of the Beth Israel grade school. He invited us into his large office and closed and locked the door. Chit-chat that led to his asking us if we had ever thought of having oral sex with another male. I was about 21 and my friend was about 20.

I cannot describe the shock we felt. The turmoil inside because here we were, invited by a leader of the congregation to what we thought would be a discussion of religious beliefs between Christians and Jews (I was non-religious then. My friend was a very devout Seventh-day Adventist, and wonderful person. We looked at each other, then back at him. We got up and left the synagogue, never to return. Angry!

But, then, only a few years ago, my wife and I studied the Torah, with Jesus at the center, where it is obvious the old Jewish man had never gone before in his thinking or reading, if he did any. Now, we are fully Torah observant Messianic Jews who have discovered the Holy Spirit’s power to help us learn it and keep it just as Jesus (Yeshua) did. Jesus and His Torah religion is what saved me, and my wife. He is coming soon. Hallelujah!

Hi Ron and welcome, you may be interested in reading the findings of a research group that investigated and offered their findings on how the Catholic Church opened itself up to these scandals:

“The National Review Board, the group of lay people who researched and reported to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-james-martin-sj/how-could-it-happen-traci_b_514965.html

 

[COMMHKS]

I admire the victims who have posted here and expressed the importance of forgiveness. If someone abused one of my daughters, I pray I could be as charitable.

To those who seem to blame the “sex abuse scandal” on liberal theologians, misguided bishops, the mainstream media or suggest that the Catholic Church is being singled out because abuse occurs in other churches or in schools, please keep in mind crimes were committed. Crimes for which people are sent to prison every single day. The priests who abused these children committed crimes against vulnerable children and should have been brought to justice.

If any bishop became aware of a priest abusing a child and sent the priest to therapy or transferred the priest to an assignment where there would be minimal contact with children, that bishop failed to report a crime. I don’t care if a psychologist told the bishop the priest could be cured through treatment or thereapy. The abouse constituted a crime and it is very clear that there was an institutional policy within the Church to cover-up these crimes.

The sooner the bishops and the pope take responsiblity for the Church’s complicity in these crimes and stop blaming the media, the sooner the scandal will be over. They were the ones who could have done something to protect these children and chose to protect themselves instead.

 

[Tybourne]

To those who seem to blame the “sex abuse scandal” on liberal theologians, misguided bishops, the mainstream media or suggest that the Catholic Church is being singled out because abuse occurs in other churches or in schools, please keep in mind crimes were committed.

Yes, those who committed the crimes and sins were responsible, like the Sanhedrin guards who seized Jesus and the Roman soldiers who crucified Him. But so were those who created and allowed the atmosphere within which the abuse could happen. These were the bishops and theologians and we, lay people, with an excessive, misplaced fawning attitude towards priests, a “lust for servility”'as Newman put it.

Gluttony leads to lust. We need to restore fasting as a serious practice in the Church, both by way of reparation for this scandal, for reunion with the Orthodox and for peace and mutual understanding with Muslims. If I tell an observant Muslim, that I am ‘fasting’ by giving up chocolate for Lent, they would laugh at me! The spirituality of Servant of God Catherine Doherty would seem to be a good place to start to explore the place of fasting.

 

[Cinette]

To RON THE NEWJEW -
…

I cannot describe the shock we felt. The turmoil inside because here we were, invited by a leader of the congregation to what we thought would be a discussion of religious beliefs between Christians and Jews (I was non-religious then. My friend was a very devout Seventh-day Adventist, and wonderful person. We looked at each other, then back at him. We got up and left the synagogue, never to return. Angry!

But, then, only a few years ago, my wife and I studied the Torah, with Jesus at the center, where it is obvious the old Jewish man had never gone before in his thinking or reading, if he did any. Now, we are fully Torah observant Messianic Jews who have discovered the Holy Spirit’s power to help us learn it and keep it just as Jesus (Yeshua) did. Jesus and His Torah religion is what saved me, and my wife. He is coming soon. Hallelujah!/QUOTE]

It was interesting reading your post. One realises how vulnerable we all are to sin, even men of God. I really do not believe marriage would change things. There are many married predators, many! I firmly believe that the paedophiles in the Church do not have a real vocation - they are not Holy men.

I believe all good men with true vocations can be celibate and good priests whether they be heterosexual or homosexual.

My husband is a highly sexual man yet he has never cheated on me I know for sure. Before he met me he had a Jewish girlfriend (a really nice girl) who was prepared to submit to him but because he knew he could not commit himself to her he felt it unfair to take advantage. Any good man could do the same. I do not believe in sex addiction - it is just an excuse.

The world today presents many temptations - books, magazines, movies, newspapers. Sex has become a form of recreation and many people think it is natural. Parents give their pre-teens the pill! (horror of horrors they do not know the harm they are doing). Abortion is OK!!! Sex is in your FACE! And there are women who throw themselves at men - even at priests. I know a priest who is magnificent - beautiful man and very very holy and committed to his priesthood. He has led many people into the Church. He is special. I wouldn’t be surprised if women throw themselves at him but I do know this - he would not yield. I would be very surprised if he did.

Life is short and anyone who is committed to God as priests are should know that their mission is sacred. Like everyone else they must take up their cross daily.

I feel for anyone whose pastor or rabbi behaves badly - I know the devastation it must make them feel. I believe that today the Church is stronger with the support of the laity who give of their time and talent to the Church.

God bless you all
Cinette

 

[Cinette]

When people complain to me about abusive clergy (this scandal started here in America many years ago, of course) I tell them that has not been my experience. My experience is with the Catholic priests and people I know, and I have had only good experiences with them. My priests work hard, are kind to me and my family and are doing their best to be good shephards of their parishes. The people I know in the parishes I have belonged to are, for the most part, well-meaning, kind people who do an incredible amount of volunteer work for the poor, elderly, sick and others. Every Catholic I know is horified that children have been abused and the perpetrators were not turned over to the police. I belong to the Catholic Church because of our high ideals and the wonderful people and clergy that I know. I don’t know any of the clergy involved in the scandal, and even if I did, it wouldn’t cause me to leave the Church, as that is their fault, not God’s. The pope is not the Church all by himself, nor are the bishops or the priests; all of us who are Catholic are the Church, and we are, by and large, good people. This Church is where I have found God, despite our faults.

You express my feelings and experience. I hurt because the abusers have not only betrayed the children and the Church, they have betrayed their fellow priests because many people now look askance at priests thinking them all to be predators. It is so sad.

We need to support and love our priests more than ever. We MUST pray for them each day.

Thank you for your post
God love you all
Cinette

 

[Cinette]

The Pope and Pope John Paul II covered it up - did they not?

I don’t believe they did. “You will know them by their fruit”

What fruit do we see in these Popes? In my opinion they are two magnificent holy men incapable of “covering up”. They may have been totally overwhelmed by the abuse. JPII was already a very old sick man but he took measures - maybe not enough. Ratzinger certainly took measures.

You must also remember that most of the abuse took place a very long time ago.

The Church needs to make amends for sure. The abused need to be loved and helped. This is such a horrible thing. We should pray for the Church and its priests constantly - always.

The enemies of the Church are chuckling but…let them who are innocent throw the first stone!

Bless you
Cinette

 

[Brigid32]

While I can understand how frustrating this whole abuse scandal must be to everyday Catholics (you can tell that I’m not Catholic), I cannot understand why, just because Jesus never married, and Paul didn’t but said “it is better to marry than it is to burn.” (I presume he meant, sexually), that the RCC leadership doesn’t simply go back to the way it was when the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods existed: marry.

Ron:
Statistically, the vast majority of pedophiles are married, heterosexual men. Celebacy has nothing to do with pedophelia, which is a psychological disorder. (Homosexuality is not related, either, except in that homosexuals are less likely to be pedophiles, according to APA statistics. Women are also less likely, although not unheard of.) It is likely, however, that adults attracted to children are more likely to enter into professions where they will encounter children, such as teaching and ministry.

While I agree that the celebacy requirement should be retracted, marriage does not cure pedophelia, as evidenced by the many married men who abuse children. By the way, the original reason the church made celebacy a requirement of ordination had nothing to do with sex, it was to keep the children of clergy from inheriting church-owned property.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

RonTheNewJew;6466634:

While I can understand how frustrating this whole abuse scandal must be to everyday Catholics (you can tell that I’m not Catholic), I cannot understand why, just because Jesus never married, and Paul didn’t but said “it is better to marry than it is to burn.” (I presume he meant, sexually), that the RCC leadership doesn’t simply go back to the way it was when the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods existed: marry.

Ron:
Statistically, the vast majority of pedophiles are married, heterosexual men. Celebacy has nothing to do with pedophelia, which is a psychological disorder. (Homosexuality is not related, either, except in that homosexuals are less likely to be pedophiles, according to APA statistics. Women are also less likely, although unheard of.) It is likely, however, that adults attracted to children are more likely to enter into professions where they will encounter children, such as teaching and ministry.

While I agree that the celebacy requirement should be retracted, marriage does not cure pedophelia, as evidenced by the many married men who abuse children. By the way, the original reason the church made celebacy a requirement of ordination had nothing to do with sex, it was to keep the children of clergy from inheriting church-owned property.

Thanks for a well thought out reply.

I don’t think the celibacy aspect of the priesthood is necessarily the silver bullet people make it out to be.

I remember now the inheritence thing.

 

[portarica]

I don’t believe they did. “You will know them by their fruit”

What fruit do we see in these Popes? In my opinion they are two magnificent holy men incapable of “covering up”. They may have been totally overwhelmed by the abuse. JPII was already a very old sick man but he took measures - maybe not enough. Ratzinger certainly took measures.

You must also remember that most of the abuse took place a very long time ago.

The Church needs to make amends for sure. The abused need to be loved and helped. This is such a horrible thing. We should pray for the Church and its priests constantly - always.

The enemies of the Church are chuckling but…let them who are innocent throw the first stone!

Bless you
Cinette

The reference to the stones is about capital punishment, but we are also supposed to take our notice of sins to another, then finally to the congregation.

And that is the point with discussing the involvement of the last couple of popes.

It is entirely appropriate to be discussing sins of omission regarding how the curia of the church has condoned abuse by inaction.Both JP 2 and B16 had knowledge of abuse and more importantly knowledge of the damage done to members of the flock by the curia’s inaction. They had the opportunity to do better, they had the tools to do better and they instead knowingly did otherwise.

It is time for the leaders of our church to step up and act as Jesus taught or resign. If they don’t like acting as Jesus taught in word and deed, then they should just shake the dust off their sandals on their way out of the Vatican.

Peace

 

[Cinette]

The reference to the stones is about capital punishment, but we are also supposed to take our notice of sins to another, then finally to the congregation.

And that is the point with discussing the involvement of the last couple of popes.

It is entirely appropriate to be discussing sins of omission regarding how the curia of the church has condoned abuse by inaction.Both JP 2 and B16 had knowledge of abuse and more importantly knowledge of the damage done to members of the flock by the curia’s inaction. They had the opportunity to do better, they had the tools to do better and they instead knowingly did otherwise.

It is time for the leaders of our church to step up and act as Jesus taught or resign. If they don’t like acting as Jesus taught in word and deed, then they should just shake the dust off their sandals on their way out of the Vatican.

Peace

Where do get your information? The New York Times?

Read this:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/reports_blaming_pope_for_mishandled_sex_abuse_case_are_inaccurate_church_judge_reveals/

You say “knowingly” - please explain how you know this?

Cinette

 

[portarica]

Where do get your information? The New York Times?

Read this:

catholicnewsagency.com/news/reports_blaming_pope_for_mishandled_sex_abuse_case_are_inaccurate_church_judge_reveals/

You say “knowingly” - please explain how you know this?

Cinette

Actually for the inaction I am not relying upon whether or not JP2 or B16 actually committed crimes according to the laws of any country , including the Vatican state.

What I am saying is that they had notice of abuse, directly from victims who sent letters to the Vatican, letters transferred to the Vatican and in the records that B16 while a cardinal had sent to the Vatican. They talk to bishops all the time, the Vatican approved settlements in the millions of dollars back in the eighties.

They had information that would have allowed them to relieve the suffering of victims and as importantly the suffering of their parents. They had observers at the meetings in the 80’s about abuse in Dallas, they had knowledge of the rules and regulations about abuse in the early 60’s.

B16 knew about abuse when he was a bishop.

I am not saying that JP2 should have been jailed or that B16 should be jailed, but it is foolish to think that very learned men such as they didn’t know abuse was bad, it is foolish to surmise that the HS responded through the ministry of discernment with instructions to not try to end abuse and further that the HS would also convey a lack of need to address the suffering of victims and their parents.

It is foolish to think that B16 was overwhelmed by reading a couple of memos a day and didn’t concern himself with abuse or the transferring of priests that abused. And if he didn’t concern himself with abuse then what does that say about his understanding of what Jesus taught about caring for the flock?

Unless you have had direct involvement with the abuse issue, you may not be privy to the amount of subterfuge going on regarding abuse.

If any person was abused after action by the Vatican could have prevented that abuse, then the people who could have prevented that abuse are as responsible for it as if they personally participated in the perversion. That is not an observation that relies upon the laws in the US, Ireland, Germany or the Vatican. It is saying that when the least pleaded with the church to stop abuse, the church didn’t treat them like Jesus may be in the guise of a future abuse victim.

Peace

 

[Tybourne]

If any person was abused after action by the Vatican could have prevented that abuse, then the people who could have prevented that abuse are as responsible for it as if they personally participated in the perversion. That is not an observation that relies upon the laws in the US, Ireland, Germany or the Vatican. It is saying that when the least pleaded with the church to stop abuse, the church didn’t treat them like Jesus may be in the guise of a future abuse victim.

That’s a powerful and passionate statement. However, recollect that the Church is found in each diocese- it is normally the responsibility of the local ordinary. Those bishops (e.g. Weakland) must certainly bear some of the guilt, it seems. Rome can and should only intervene in exceptional circumstances, which they did under BXVI, with the 2001 transfer of all such cases to his Congregation. Maybe JPII could have done more- there are reasons he didn’t, but it seems that BXVI has done more than any pope or bishop in history, as the canon lawyer in the case of Fr Murphy stated.

 

[ccolley]

The reference to the stones is about capital punishment, but we are also supposed to take our notice of sins to another, then finally to the congregation.

And that is the point with discussing the involvement of the last couple of popes.

It is entirely appropriate to be discussing sins of omission regarding how the curia of the church has condoned abuse by inaction.Both JP 2 and B16 had knowledge of abuse and more importantly knowledge of the damage done to members of the flock by the curia’s inaction. They had the opportunity to do better, they had the tools to do better and they instead knowingly did otherwise.

It is time for the leaders of our church to step up and act as Jesus taught or resign. If they don’t like acting as Jesus taught in word and deed, then they should just shake the dust off their sandals on their way out of the Vatican.

Peace

Popes don’t RESIGN! This isn’t some little club they belong to…they were elected FOR LIFE! Benedict XVI will be vindicated! In the meantime, I am praying for everyone involved.
CC
[SIGN] I (still) love my Papal Papa! [/SIGN]

 

[portarica]

That’s a powerful and passionate statement. However, recollect that the Church is found in each diocese- it is normally the responsibility of the local ordinary. Those bishops (e.g. Weakland) must certainly bear some of the guilt, it seems. Rome can and should only intervene in exceptional circumstances, which they did under BXVI, with the 2001 transfer of all such cases to his Congregation. Maybe JPII could have done more- there are reasons he didn’t, but it seems that BXVI has done more than any pope or bishop in history, as the canon lawyer in the case of Fr Murphy stated.

The problem is that while a relatively small number of priests were abusers (1-4%) almost 100% of bishops condoned abuse by covering it up. They either blatantly transferred people or they weren’t concerned about it.

Rome could have ended the problem in the 60’s or the 80’s just by having the pope utter the following: “any priest who abuses or any bishop or cardinal who condones abuse by action or inaction will be dismissed from the priesthood”

The pope could say that and the problem would have been solved , instead they secretly OK’d payments to victims, had victims swear themselves to secrecy and the like. In the wake of their actions they left many damaged children and parents. To say the hands of the Vatican were tied in any fashion is foolish.

The popes just had to have the courage to save the Lambs of God from further abuse, shame and damage. They instead decided to cover their own behinds and engage in subterfuge.

The two most operative words in the abuse scandal are " condone" and “subterfuge”. Look up the definitions and the appropriateness of the words to the scandal is all too clear.

Peace

 

[portarica]

I’ll save some effort.

Subterfuge: an artifice or expedient used to evade a rule, escape a consequence, hide something, etc.

Condone1.to disregard or overlook (something illegal, objectionable, or the like).
2.to give tacit approval to: By his silence, he seemed to condone their behavior.
3.to pardon or forgive (an offense); excuse.
4.to cause the condonation of.
5.Law. to forgive or act so as to imply forgiveness of (a violation of the marriage vow).

Peace

 

[Tybourne]

almost 100% of bishops condoned abuse by covering it up. They either blatantly transferred people or they weren’t concerned about it.

Rome could have ended the problem in the 60’s or the 80’s just by having the pope utter the following: “any priest who abuses or any bishop or cardinal who condones abuse by action or inaction will be dismissed from the priesthood”

Thanks for taking the time to post those definitions.

100%? Do you have a source for that figure? In the U.S.? In the whole Church?

I’m not sure if it’s true that “they weren’t concerned about it”. Some bishops may have genuinely thought that sending priests for ‘treatment’ and then reassigning them *was *being concerned.

“any priest who abuses or any bishop or cardinal who condones abuse by action or inaction will be dismissed from the priesthood” But how would we define sufficient action? The idea that merely juridical processes in canon law would have been enough to stop the problem seems mistaken to me, with respect. Rather, I see it, as Pope Benedict says, as a problem of spirituality and formation. Does this make any sense, or does it just seem like belittling the abuse? I’m genuinely trying to make sense of this myself.

True story: As I was thinking, worrying and praying about it, driving along the other day, my eyes were caught by a truck with numberplate CCC 834. I couldn’t get that number out of my head. When I got home that day I looked up the relevant paragraph in the Catechism:

Particular Churches are fully catholic through their communion with one of them, the Church of Rome “which presides in charity.” "For with this church, by reason of its pre-eminence, the whole Church, that is the faithful everywhere, must necessarily be in accord."Indeed, “from the incarnate Word’s descent to us, all Christian churches everywhere have held and hold the great Church that is here [at Rome] to be their only basis and foundation since, according to the Savior’s promise, the gates of hell have never prevailed against her.”

!!

Now Pope Benedict must act decisively to show this is true.

Peace and blessings for Holy Week.

 

[portarica]

Thanks for taking the time to post those definitions.

100%? Do you have a source for that figure? In the U.S.? In the whole Church?

I’m not sure if it’s true that “they weren’t concerned about it”. Some bishops may have genuinely thought that sending priests for ‘treatment’ and then reassigning them *was *being concerned.

“any priest who abuses or any bishop or cardinal who condones abuse by action or inaction will be dismissed from the priesthood” But how would we define sufficient action? The idea that merely juridical processes in canon law would have been enough to stop the problem seems mistaken to me, with respect. Rather, I see it, as Pope Benedict says, as a problem of spirituality and formation. Does this make any sense, or does it just seem like belittling the abuse? I’m genuinely trying to make sense of this myself.

True story: As I was thinking, worrying and praying about it, driving along the other day, my eyes were caught by a truck with numberplate CCC 834. I couldn’t get that number out of my head. When I got home that day I looked up the relevant paragraph in the Catechism:

!!

Now Pope Benedict must act decisively to show this is true.

Peace and blessings for Holy Week.

I didn’t say 100%, I said “almost” 100%. It was rather simple math, divide the number of bishops by the number that didn’t condone abuse by speaking up and acting within their dioceses to eliminate abuse. Unfortunately there is scant evidence of bishops being pro-active. Perhaps some of the more informed posters can come up with a list of bishops that fought abuse by their own volition.

Peace

 

[holy_moly]

I converted to the Catholic faith from Protestantism in 2007. I am coming up on my 3rd anniversary. I am proud of this Church and have never looked back. I can respond to atheist and Protestant objections, but this one is stumping me. How is this happening? What do we say? We have to face this squarely; we can not just deny the underlying truth. I also realize that many in the media and government will use this to attack the faith generally and Catholicism in particular. We need to develop a rational and organized response. What can those of us in the pews and trenches do? I know, we can pray the rosary and have special Masses - we should - but how do we get the moral high ground again? It will take decades, I fear. When we condenm abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research, gay marriage, or homosexual practice, the response is “don’t talk to me about my life and how people should live when your priests are abusing children!” I am concerned we are facing the biggest threat since the Reformation. I don’t believe for a minute that Pope Benedict was involved or neglectful, but I’m afraid his reputation is damaged (falsely) and that ultimately his health may be threatened by this battle. Some will attack him with this for the rest of his papacy. I pray for the victims and even for those priests who did this and are willing to repent. I admit, I pray for God’s wrath on those priests who don’t repent and on those who use this as an excuse to attack the Church. I am angry and hurting at this same time about all of this!

Remeber who is really behind this attack on the church… no, not the media, but satan! There would be no attacks on the Holy, Mother Church, if she weren’t the One, True Church. Always pray for the Church in general & for all priests in particular!